[MAxx]

I'm a CPA/ Tax accountant but I do not specialize in individual or gambling taxes. I've poked around a bit and am somewhat knowlegeable about the issues. Certainly good enough to feel comfortable about my own filing, but not enough to advise others. IMO some of it is pretty cut and dry. Other aspects of it are part art and subject to interpretation. Some of it perhaps is just a question of how aggressive you want to be vs. your threshold for risk.

My biggest question is about following the definition of a "session". Is this generally subject to loose or rigid interpretation? Certainly this definition was not created with the mulit-tabling, table hopping, internet style of poker in mind.

If you choose to take a much more liberal interpretation of the meaning of a session, such as saying 1 day= 1 session (when techically a day could constist of well over 10 to perhaps a hundred sessions), how much of an exposure does this create? Is the IRS likely to beef with you over this issue?

I would think that most local CPAs would probably have a similiar level understanding of gambling taxes as I have. Basically the type of solid understanding of taxlaws, access to research resources, good judgement, but little experience with gambooling taxes positions that have been examined by the IRS. This would mean that they would likely be makeing some interpretations as well as making some judgements. But I would not think they would have the experience with gambling taxes to give clients an extremely airtight position. Certainly better than a layman, but I'd be surprised if there was anything even slightly approaching uniform treatment of reporting poker/gambling income from CPA to CPA. I'd be curious what other CPA's thought about my statements.

-MAxx